Reviewer Comments - EERE

2011 Algae Platform Review – Reviewer Comments
Reviewer Comments are direct transcripts of commentary and material provided by the Platform’s
Review Panel. They have not been edited or altered by the Biomass Program.
has met its objectives in achieving milestones and overcoming technical barriers
Reviewer Comments
Reviewer: 1 Criteria Score: 5
The progress is adequate to the time spent on the project so far.
Reviewer: 2 Criteria Score: 6
Progress in this project is satisfactory, but the things mentioned in the approach section would likely
improve the project.
Reviewer: 3 Criteria Score: 4
Development of a GIS-based Biomass Assessment Tool that integrates high-resolution data with
biophysical models to provide spatially/temporally explicit estimates of production potential and resource
demands and constants
Reviewer: 4 Criteria Score: 7
See Overall Impressions text.
Reviewer: 5 Criteria Score: 6
Scientists have not finished different modules, but indicated that milestones will be accomplished by the
project deadlines.
Reviewer: 6 Criteria Score: 7
No problem - good work progress.
Reviewer: 7 Criteria Score: 4
Progress falls significantly short of the state that should be required before specific estimates are
presented and published.
Presenter Response
[2.1] N/C --- [2.2] See Response 1.2(a-c) --- [2.3] N/C --- [2.4] N/C --- [2.5] The project in on track to
meet project milestones and deadlines. --- [2.6] N/C --- [2.7] The research, methodology, and products
developed under the current project provide key building blocks to realizing the ability to represent the
full lifecycle process. We feel that sufficient progress has been made to establish national baseline
conditions under well-specified assumptions and limitations (Wigmosta et. al 2011). As such, there are
clear benefits to the scientific research community to share periodic and logical progressions within
specific lifecycle stages; the current project has benefited from such presentations and publications from
others, and our assumptions, results and contributions have been peer-reviewed by experts in the field and
published in Wigmosta et. al (2011).
Wigmosta, M. S., A. M. Coleman, R. J. Skaggs, M. H. Huesemann, and L. J. Lane (2011), National
microalgae biofuel production potential and resource demand, Water Resour. Res., 47, W00H04,
doi:10.1029/2010WR009966.
3. Project Relevance
The project both identifies with and contributes to meeting the platform goals and objectives of the
Biomass Program Multi-Year Program Plan
The project has considered applications of the expected outputs
Page 94 of 223